Home

[ed-uk]

And the shows in Discoveryland, Lion King, Mulan, Disney Classic Show, how did that work for you? And what about Michael Jackson, does he fit into Discoveryland ? Every Disneyland Park from California to Tokyo has Buzz Light year in Tomorrowland.

[Burzgrokash]

Well it didn't work for me. The Shows were the first sings of the decline of the jules-verne-discoveryland. And besides that these Shows didn't destroy the whole ensemble of the discoveryland, because they were hidden in a building. Captain EO himself didn't fit too, but it wasn't pushed into the foreground as it happened (and happens) with buzz lightyear.

[ed-uk]

We can go to a shop in Main Street USA and buy a Disney DVD, Bambi, Toy Story maybe. We couldn't have done that when Walt Disney was alive.

[pfspock]

Well, Star Tours and Captain EO/HIStA are located in a separate part of Discoveryland, dedicated to today's visionaries. Buzz might have fitted in there. Every Tomorrowland has the problem that what may look futuristic today will look dated tomorrow. The brillant idea behind Discoverland was that the Main Part was dedicated to visionaries of the past, therefore representing the look they envisioned 100 years ago, thus avoiding the danger of looking antiquated by being antiquated in a victorian, therefore romantic Way in the first place. Never mind the shows, they may not have fit the theme, but they were in a theater at least and not destroying the feel of the land.
Yes, Timekeeper looked dated in 2002, it would even more of it was still operating today. I guess noone would have had a problem if they replaced it with something else Fitting the theming. But Buzz is too modern and in no way as timeless as the tales by Verne and Wells. DLP should not be a museum, if an attraction's time is over so Be it. But do it in a way that keeps the story intact.

[DutchBrit]

It is not ok for Disney to exploit their products, because they are selling out all the ideals Walt Disney had, when he created Disneyland in California.

Walt Disney's idea was to make a successful and popular business, both in films and in amusment parks. He had his own ideas about how you do that, but he's been dead for nearly 60 years and time and the market moves on. Disney needs to sell merchandise and be successful, just like every other theme park, and the way to get ahead is to do it better. If you can accept Legoland selling lego, accept Disneyland selling disney.

[Burzgrokash]

DLP should not be a museum, if an attraction's time is over so Be it. But do it in a way that keeps the story intact.

That is exactly what bothers me, they're doing it the wrong way. I'm not complaining about Buzz, I'm complaining about where they put him. Discoveryland is not the right place for him. The Studios are.

[ed-uk]

And also the Walt Disney company have to make commercial decisions. Toy Story is a big money spinner for Disney ( Jules Verne isn't really ), so why wouldn't they have a Toy Story attraction in their parks. OK it might not fit that closely with Jules Verne in Discoveryland. But Toy Story is big for Disney, the films and the merchandise.

[Burzgrokash]

That's right and I do like the Toy Story Movies. But in my opinion they have the studios for their Toon-Theming.
I know that Disney is a company, that wants to maximize their profit like every other company in the world. But then I think of the effort they put into the magic kingdom. The Frontierland for example, where every Attraction is connected to the others through the story of thunder mesa and so on. I mean they imagineered the whole thing...and now they're destroying it in a way. And that's what's sad in my opinion, because this imagineering was, what DLRP made special in comparison to the other Parks.

[DLP-Photos.com]

I think this is once again all about a question of level of ambition...

Correct Toy Story is popular, it is a huge merchandise hit and an obvious choice for a new attraction due the fact that it will probably create a good revenue flow right after. But it is also the easy choice and I doubt that Toy Story Playland for instance will be the reason for serious attendance growth in a longer period. Really the only two additions since opening that has accomplished this are the highly ambitious Space Mountain and Tower of Terror which had absolutely nothing to do with the easy choices, which a company of Disney's size without a doubt posseses in their huge collection of movies.

Some are satisfied with the easy choices, but some want them to show the same level of ambition of previous times, which has put them where they are - on the very top of theme park visionaries. This position is not a result of Buzz Lightyear - it is the result of Walt Disney Imagineering who has made so many "firsts" in theme park creation that is hard to count - lately all they done is to do just enough to stay on top. I guess some of us just feel a little bit left down by this knowing what they are capable of.

[ed-uk]

I don't compare TOT to Buzz Lightyear just like I don't compare Stunt Show to Tarzan show. We all know what great things Disney Imagineers are capable of when budgets allow. We all want big block buster rides with great themeing, and the cost of some of these rides is huge, Disney couldn't do it everytime. I like Buzz Lightyear better than Orbitron as a ride.

[DLP-Photos.com]

I don't compare TOT to Buzz Lightyear just like I don't compare Stunt Show to Tarzan show. We all know what great things Disney Imagineers are capable of when budgets allow. We all want big block buster rides with great themeing, and the cost of some of these rides is huge, Disney couldn't do it everytime. I like Buzz Lightyear better than Orbitron as a ride.

No of course although you can compare Stunt Show and Tarzan (both are top class entertainment - haven't seen Moteurs... with Lightning McQueen yet though - it doesn't sound good to me) - I was just trying to cast a light over some of ours disappointment with the many easy additions lately which in the end has taken up quite a lot of the budgets.

Take TSPL for instance - that was actually quite a big investment and still it brings nothing "new".. I think we all know and agree that money are tight now, but that just makes it even more important that they are used wisely - to me a wise use would be on fewer, yet better additions, which would not only secure their top spot in the world of theme parks but build on it.

Personally I am way more excited by this years refurbishments than with the addition of Toon Studio and TSPL - after all I think people are more likely to be coming back to a park which seems new and well maintained than a park which is falling apart, while a giant Buzz Lightyear welcomes people to the newest land, which offers simple carnival rides with huuge waiting times. (Roughly said)

[Patrick89]

As was said above: Even if i don't like attractions being replaced (or better: old attractions - I would not be too disappointed if, for example, Mission 2 would be replaced   ), I would probably welcome new rides fitting in the theme and improving the -lands. But in my opinion the opposite has happened, cheap attractions destroying the former atmosphere and dispossessing the park of what has made him so special.

And still, while nearly everything has fallen off in quality (at least in my opinion...), Disneyland is still the best park in the world (again my opinion   ), but as forza has already mentioned: It is sad to see rides like in TSPL while imagining what Disney was possible to do in the past...

I also agree with Burzgrokash: Why not put all the Buzz stuff (Pizza Planet, BLLB) in the Studios? I think nobody would have complained about that, because we would still have Jules Verne...
And another proposal: Kick Woody & friends out of Frontierland and return to the American West feeling that has characterized Cottonwood Creek Ranch once...

[ed-uk]

I don't teach Disney to suck eggs, I think they know what they're doing. New additions to the park and maintanance are both important to me. I haven't seen Stunt show with Lightning McQueen but I have seen it with Herbie and there's not a  whole lot of difference to me. I'm not a big fan of the Herbie films. And TSPL did bring in something "new" to the studios. Smaller rides true, but they sit along side the bigger rides like TOT and Rock n Roller Coaster. If TSPl had Orbitron, Flying Elephants and a Carousel in it, maybe people would have liked it more. Who would go to a Disney theme park and be surprised to find Snow White, Buzz Lightyear, Lightning McQueen And Nemo ? Some people go for that very reason. the Studios is much busier now thanks to Toon Studios.

[DLP-Photos.com]

Who would go to a Disney theme park and be surprised to find Snow White, Buzz Lightyear, Lightning McQueen And Nemo ? Some people go for that very reason. the Studios is much busier now thanks to Toon Studios.

And you should be able to see them - don't get me wrong, I love seeing a few Disney characters every now and then when going as they are part of the experience. It would just be so much easier to enjoy them if they were placed where they fit in and don't ruin the many other parts of the experience you get when going to Disneyland...

Buzz doesn't fit in along Jules Verne and other great visionaries.

Lightning McQueen doesn't belong in a serious stunt show, which honors the work of the great stunt drivers, who create the biggest, best and most dangerous scenes of the biggest action movies - Lightning McQueen is a CGI car. Herbie didn't fit in either, but at least he was from a real life picture.

Nemo doesn't fit into a Toon Studio, which should still tell us a story about "toon studio life". I like Crush, but it doesn't really fit into the Toon Studio idea.

Snow White fits into Fantasyland, which is a celebration of fantasy and the many fairytales that Walt Disney Pictures has brought to life. A fitting place for her.

[ed-uk]

Nemo is a Toon, so he does fit in to Toon Studios. Toon Studios takes you into a scene from a Toon film. I agree Buzz Lightyear hasn't got anything to do with Jules Verne, but he has got a lot to do with Disney and it is Disneyland. Every new ride in Discoveryland would have to be taken from Jules Verne otherwise. Would that always be possible? Every Disney park from California to Tokyo has put Buzz into Tomorrowland, but at DLP it's called Discoveryland. Maybe it wasn't possible for EuroDisney to build a new show building for Buzz in the Studios at the time. And just because Lightning McQueen is from a CGI film it doesn't make him less important to Disney than Herbie, even if he does come from a "real" film made in the 1960's.